I'm aware it may be awhile before someone reads and posts constructive criticism. I'm also aware that I may be off with containment procedures (such as measurements and space), so I have no problem fixing the petty stuff if someone more experienced points it out.

To start of with; the containment procedures. The procedures aren't that ridiculous, the room measurements are just fine, it's reasonable that staff would need some space to walk around the SCP to observe it and have some decent space to conduct interviews, though you should remember to change feet and inches to meters.

… restrained to a 6ft steel pole …

more or less becomes

… restrained to a 2 meter pole …

Although there seems to be no reason why the lights should changed as requested by the SCP. It is a prison, not a hotel. If it is as requested by someone else, then that should be specified.

Change:

… with an endoskeleton made up entirely …

to

… with an skeleton made up entirely …

No need to specify that the skeleton is inside the creature. Unless it is an exoskeleton, it is to be assumed that it is internal.

Reading the description, i found myself getting a little confused.

… confirmed to be human skin. The subject is capable of movement and speech, with several other human-like features such as a mouth, a full set of teeth, light chin-length hair, nostrils, and a pair of luminescent eyes.

This kind of suggests that it is an actual living human corpse that has been tied to a stick. You should clarify early in the description whether it is human, a living scarecrow or something else, by saying something to the power of:

Although SCP-XXXX has certain similarities to human anatomy, it is confirmed not to be human, as analysis show that …

The subject is capable of movement and speech …

You write that it is capable of moving. Does that mean that it can walk around or just wiggle around on the stick? This is written later in the article, but such basic information needs to written in the beginning of the description, to give the reader an clear idea about what it is we are reading about.

The subject is capable of movement and speech …

Almost the same critique as the one above about movement, but this one is a bit more serious. It can speak, but does that mean that it does? Can it have complex conversations, or does it speak in short, primitive commands? Saying that a creature can speak, implies a lot of things about its cognitive abilities. Does that mean that it is an intelligent being? Does it feel pain? Does it have a distinct personality? and if so; how does it talk to people?

… use this secretive information against its target in a taunting fashion.

and

SCP-XXX's refusal in cooperation …

suggests that the SCP can converse with staff and that it is kind of a dick, but its such personality traits, as well as basic information like the fact that it is a sentient, thinking creature, has to be made clear to the reader very early in the description.

SCP-XXX is unaffected by violent physical contact but is seemingly weak to electricity.

First of all;

violent physical contact

should probably be changed to something like:

blunt force trauma

as "violent physical contact" is too vague. Does that include shooting it? Blowing it up? Running it over?

But second; "unaffected" this is also very vague. How is it unaffected by physical contact? What would if i hit it with a sledgehammer? It actually seems pretty unnecessary for the actual story that it is indestructible. It raises more questions than it answers and it doesn't really need to be indistrucable to begin with.

SCP-XXX is unaffected by violent physical contact but is seemingly weak to electricity.

Thanks for the info! I'll fix the descriptions asap and make things more clear. One thing I want to fix for sure is dispelling the idea that the anomaly is indestructible—I know readers tend to hate SCP's like that. If anyone has any criticism for the addendums and such, I'm all ears.

I actually considered writing an entire thing about the addendums, but i cut it out last minute. I think that having seven different addendums, whereof five of them are interviews with the SCP is a bit overkill. I would consider combining some together or simply removing some that aren't necessary. Having to read seven addendums can be a daunting task for even avid readers.

- Remove Addendum C,D,E and F
The problem with these interviews is something i also personally struggle with when writing SCPs. Although these things would be fascinating if we were actually studying the SCP, they don't add much, if anything, to the SCPs story. It is important to remember that SCP articles are not actual scientific journals. They are pieces of literature written with the purpose of entertaining an audience, by presenting a story of a mysterious and anomalous object in the style of scientific journals.

- Also remove Addendum A-Recovery
It is almost always an important part of an SCPs story to know where it came from, but this should probably just be written in the description, as where and how the SCP was found and recovered, can tell a lot about the SCP and what it is. Especially in this case, where the log is so short, that it doesn't really even warrant an actual "recovery-log". Some SCPs benefit from having long and detailed recovery-logs, but a majority, including this one, should just have a paragraph in the description explaining where it was found.

- Addendum B-Interview and G-Converse can more or less stay.
The information presented in the two pieces is both interesting and add to the story. We only need a single interview to understand the SCPs personality, and that it will embarrass and mock staff, seemingly just because it thinks that it is funny.

I will also say that, although i do enjoy the idea that the SCP talks to itself and just has in depth conversations with itself, this information doesn't really have to be its own addendum. For an example, an interview might end with the researcher exiting the room after the interview, and the SCP just continues talking, answering its own questions and so on. That might be fun.

One thing that i would personally change about the actual SCP, would be to make it so that it can barely move at all. I would make it unable to move anything below its torso (hips, legs, feet etc.), and only barely able to move its arms a little bit, where its head can move around a bit to look at the person it is talking to. The main focus of the SCP is its personality and what it says. It being practically unable to move or stand on its own, would add to its provocative nature when it insults and mocks its interviewers. I would even say that, it being able to position its hands into the "fuck" position, and then actually flipping somebody the bird, actually has a negative impact on its personality.

All in all i enjoy the article, and i might even give it a positive rating when the time comes.

I'll play around with the addendums; I definitely want to keep the amnestic experiments because it throws in conflict with that drug and gets Ethics Committee involved, which I haven't seen a lot in SCP articles. I've been told by a few veterans that story-like info can be positive, but I guess that's suggestive. Like I said, I'll play around with it.

I'll definitely take your idea of it being paralyzed from the waist-below, though. So, noted.